10:45 am - Amazing Japanese Solutions It's been 38 weeks (!!) since my last post, and it really feels frustrating not being able to write as often as I'd want to. Sigh.
(Am I violating any copyright laws by posting this link? I hope not...)
Gives the expression "magtanim ka na lang ng kamote" a whole new meaning, doesn't it? This just blew me away. Friggin' BRILLIANT!
Makes me feel a lot better... Especially during a time when everyone else around me makes me feel worse. Current Location:Makati office Current Mood: crappy Current Music: none
Using the power of decision gives you the capacity to get past any excuse to change any and every part of your life in an instant. ~Anthony Robbins
Day by day we are faced with situations which force us to make choices. Should I take breakfast at home or at work? Should I turn left or right? Should I talk to him/her? Should I finish this now or leave it for tomorrow morning? Decision-making is an indelible event in everyday of our lives. What is amazing, puzzling, and altogether irritating is that nearly everyone narrows down the vast horizon of choices into an eye of a needle by proclaiming this run-down and overused cliché - “This is the only way”.
Man has many differences from beast - one of them being the ability to see beyond any obstacles and find ways to overcome or maneuver around it. For a person to just see one solution and ignore the rest, there must be a reason behind this behavior. What makes one oblivious to all other solutions available?
Perhaps the most obvious reason is despair. When a person is in deep, emotional (and sometimes intellectual and spiritual) despair all pathways get fogged-up and questionable. This pushes the victim to go for the clearest and fastest way to reach either another pathway towards the goal or the goal itself. We are then faced with an altogether familiar dilemma that we’ve all faced at least once in our lifetime: should one look before we leap, or take a leap of faith? There is always another choice, and the blinding darkness of despair is also the tiny voice in our heads that tell us to make hasty decisions. This is also the same voice that mocks and laughs at us when we start blaming ourselves for making a bad decision.
Another reason is impatience. The younger generations have developed a widespread case of ADD (Attention Deficit Disorder), and this is very evident with the abundance of automation, direct links, “real-time” events, faster connections and other similar terminologies synonymous to “getting there now”. Once faced with dilemmas, these people tend to go for the first available option and forget about the rest. When they get to the next option, that’s when they’d think about where to go to next. It’s a faster, adrenaline-rushing journey that involves reflexive thinking and relies heavy on impulsiveness. The faster you go, the more pain you acquire when turning into a dead-end or tripping over unseen obstacles.
Perhaps the last and least admitted reasons are pride and laziness. People tend to want things to happen rather than reflect on each action to undertake. Think-before-you-do no longer exists as widely as it once has; in its place lies a new movement - Do-now-think-later. It may have similar symptoms as impatience, but this reason bears a greater danger, in the form of “non-choice”, or popularly known locally as “bahala na”. Non-choice or “bahala na” is entirely different from not choosing at all, since not taking any options is a choice and option in itself, readily available in all scenarios. When one leaves the decision-making to a “higher power” (i.e. God, destiny, etc.), does one honestly think someone (or something) else will make that decision for him/her? The answer should be pretty obvious.
What people fail to realize is that there are two obvious ways towards making decisions that yield fruitful and gainful results - REFLECTION and NO REGRETS.
Reflection is the most obvious key that can overcome any problem thrown at a person. People are not limited by options; options are limited by people. Human beings are equipped with the ability to make ways towards better solutions. For a “higher power” to limit options so tightly, there must be a willful hindrance to other choices. Real, insurmountable hindrances are only acknowledged by current, physical impossibilities; therefore, the only way options can be limited are through the hands of a physical “higher power”. Obviously, this does not exist, and will all the more never exist when an individual arms himself/herself with constant reflections.
Having no regrets is a more advanced method on taking action; it requires the ability to acknowledge that one has tripped, but not fallen. It requires one to keep moving forward and not stall nor stagger. This ability is normally brought about by maturity and experience, although it is not impossible to accelerate its growth in younger people. By having no regrets, the fear of enduring the consequences of an action gets thinned (and at times does not exist at all), enabling faster recovery from unfruitful decisions and retaining one’s goal in his/her mind no matter what happens.
Reflection takes place before and during one’s decision, while having no regrets takes place after an option has been taken (although it is possible to pre-meditate having no regrets before the option or action is undertaken). This makes both keys available for simultaneous use, making one formidable when trekking the journey of one’s day-to-day life.
Should everyone realize this, we can be assured that a more fruitful environment can be borne from this realization. Now a new question arises: how can we have everyone realize this?
This journey takes one step at a time.
Current Location:at home Current Mood: irritated Current Music: a very noisy AC unit
This is the reason why I love The Corrs - their melodies and lyrics just hit the spot. Even for a guy like me, their words are just so apt for whatever emotions I feel for someone. Details are just so vivid yet vague enough for you to ask for more.
This one is for you, no matter how many people think this is their song.
ONLY WHEN I SLEEP Music: The Corrs, Oliver Leiber, Paul Peterson, John Shanks Lyrics: Andrea Corr Transcript: www.corrsonline.com
You're only just a dreamboat Sailing in my head You swim my secret oceans Of coral blue and red Your smell is incense burning Your touch is silken yet It reaches through my skin And moving from within It clutches at my breast
But it's only when I sleep See you in my dreams You got me spinning round and round Turning upside-down But I only hear you breathe
Somewhere in my sleep Got me spinning round and round Turning upside-down But its only when I sleep
And when I wake from slumber Your shadows disappear Your breath is just a sea mist Surrounding my body I'm workin' through the daytime But when it's time to rest I'm lying in my bed Listening to my breath Falling from the edge
But it's only when I sleep See you in my dreams, (dreams) You got me spinning round and round Turning upside-down But I only hear you breathe Somewhere in my sleep, (in my sleep) Got me spinning round and round Turning upside-down But its only when I sleep It's only when I sleep
[Sharon & Andrea solo]
Up to the sky Where angels fly I'll never die Hawaiian High In bed I lie No need to cry My sleeping cry Hawaiian High
It's reaching through my skin Movin' from within And clutches at my breasts...
But it's only when I sleep... See you in my dreams, (dreams) You got me spinning round and round Turning upside-down But I only hear you breathe
In bed I lie No need to cry My sleeping cry Hawaiian High
But it's only when I sleep... aaaaaaa.... Got me spinning round and round (Turning upside-down)
Up to the sky Where angels fly I'll never die Hawaiian High But it's only when I sleep...
Fade out Current Location:at home Current Mood: mellow Current Music: what else?
All of us, at one point or another, had a little voice at the back of our minds asking "what if" questions. What if I have done that? What if I didn't? What if I was here? Or there? Some may have more than others, but they all result in a few seconds of images floating in our heads, bringing us into an alternate reality altogether and back. Whether we like it or not, the existentialist side of our beings stir and become, to some extent, uneasy until an answer is produced, no matter if one knows that this "answer" is a product of imagination or self-shaped fiction.
While some people love delving into the realms of daydreaming their what-ifs, some turn their backs to it, labeling it as "unproductive" or "useless". Whichever way one reacts to it, it will always be a little itch that only oneself can scratch.
Both sides of the coin would argue to the benefits and liabilities that entertaining these thoughts would bring. Of course, contexts of those who attempt to answer these questions will come into place. Realists would sneer at the thought of entertaining questions posed by these snippets of imagination, while romanticists may argue the importance of these thoughts.
A question is to be posed in this situation - how do we handle thoughts of alternate realities?
Though it may seem easier said than done, a balance of both sides must be present in everyone. The fact that every human being has had a "what if" at least once in their life demonstrates the ability of a human being to dream (not in the normative connotation of the word; rather, quite literal) and let go of the chains of reality. On the other hand, the fact that before and after these dreams occur we find ourselves back in reality shows that no matter how hard we dream we still find ourselves in the here and now.
These "what ifs" are not to be taken as is - doing so may very well lead to regret, whichever intensity it may turn out to be. These remote possibilities popping in and out of our heads may represent several things (in whichever form - physical, intellectual, emotional, moral, etc.) in the past which may or may not be happening in the here and now. Nevertheless, that thing which the "what if" embodies matters in the here and now - maybe not practically, but also definitely not entirely hypothetically.
"What ifs" may as well be guides that will definitely affect one's here and now no matter how hard one denies it. The choice to entertain the thought and the choice not to do so are both choices made. Given this, the fact that one made a conscious (or more importantly, a subconscious) choice to accept or ignore makes the "what if" significant to the here and now; i.e. ignoring it makes one's actions and decisions in the present reality firmer, while entertaining it makes one more reflective about one's present reality.
Whichever way a person handles this type of situation, a balance is still needed. Although this balance does not dictate an equal 50/50 balance, any possible context would still require both a reflection using "what ifs" and a stance in reality. With just one side present, the here and now becomes unfruitful and, at times, tragic. Current Location:at home Current Mood: inspired Current Music: Chopsuey, playing over and over in my head
A new year has come upon the whole humanity (and anything else whose sense of time is similar to ours), and it is inevitable how people tend to set resolutions for themselves. It is very interesting how people base their resolutions on events, objects, or people they do not want to encounter in the incoming year.
There is an unseen line in between each resolution listed - "Since this happened this year, then...", or "I don't want this to happen again, so...", or other similar lines. Although this is may not be intentional, this is stll the root of every want - an unwant.
Chinese philosophical schools of thought have followed this for ages - specifically yin and yang, a Taoist school of thought (correct me if I'm wrong) - and it seems that no other philosophy has been able to question it or challenge its universal adaptability. One cannot exist without the other, one cannot exclude the other, opposite sides are intedependent on the other - these are just a few summaries of the yin and yang, and all underlie the fact that these 2 sides are not always equal in scope or area affected. There may be imbalances (the Taijitu - yin yang symbol - does not portray it to enforce a balance in all its followers as much as possible, although a 3D interactive version must be available to educate followers and pseudo-followers alike), but only in scope; the wider the scope of one gets, the more concentrated the other becomes.
Even the concept of utopia is affected by this philosophy; "The Ones Who Walk away from Omelas", written by Ursula Le Guin, epitomizes the idea of how a society attains a level of utopia at the price of a young child who is kept in a world of misery. In this case, the Yang was spread so widely over the spectrum (losing its brightness) while the Yin was minimized (take note - minimized, not eradicated) to a very dark point.
It is safe to assume that resolutions are made and attempted to be reached by each individual to attain a personal utopia; however, are these efforts clearly reflected on? The effect of having unwants as the basis of these resolutions may be more destructive than productive, as the yin-yang depicted in the abovementioned short story imbalance may occur once resolutions are reached. By trying to attain a resolution based on the unwants, the unwants get highlighted, therefore the gratification attained upon completing the resolution becomes temporary.
If the resolutions, on the other hand, are created based on other positivities, it would be more like painting a picture based on how one object or color would complement the rest. The picture, once completed, becomes more beautiful and gets enhanced and completed over time, as compared to a painting created with different images in mind every time the paintbrush touches the canvass.
This is how "good" and "bad" resolutions are measured, if anyone would really want to measure it, that is. There really isn't anything wrong with making resolutions; however, carefully reflected ones would benefit not only the self, but others existing in the same environment as well. Current Location:Cafe at Pearl Drive Current Mood: contemplative Current Music: Kids yelling while playing some online game
People are filled with notions of idealism. There always is a certain “ideal” setting for everything. It is natural for humans to find what is best for them, but is ideology in all settings healthy?
Idealism is instilled in us particularly in higher learning, i.e. college. In almost all social science subjects (political science, economics, communications, etc.) there are theories and models which show us a cause and effect for in a vacuum – needless to say, even exceptions which are considered in these models are conceptualized and pre-meditated, which makes them part of a vacuum or ceteris paribus environment. The real world may present challenges to the scholars of these disciplines which are similar to these pre-meditated scenarios taken up in school; what most haven’t learned though is the dynamism of a human environment. These dynamisms may lead to one’s advantage, but more often than not it results in huge disappointments.
On one hand, one must consider why these theories and socio-political/socio-economic models are studied in the first place – to prepare everyone for these “common” scenarios, with similarities in different extents. It also presents a chance for these scholars to create an “ideal” environment once endowed with enough power and authority to do so, i.e. once promoted or upon acquiring a hegemonic center position in the environment the individual exists in. These are two different cases altogether, and if the latter is a result of a carefully followed former then the cases must still be taken individually, not consequentially.
The presentation of these “preparations” (or “introduction to the real world”, so to speak) are instilled in the students minds as a logical flow – if A happens, then B must be done to correct it. Whether this kind of education is intentional or accidental, the material itself presents this kind of logic to those who are exposed to it. In a dynamic world, however, the action A is not simply as is – A may be equal to A1, A2, A3 and may continue even beyond the possibilities that the most gifted scholar could fathom. These possibilities may not only multiply but alter as time goes on, i.e. if the theory says “if A happens, then B must be done”, there will come a time wherein B may be more unproductive than sticking to A.
In the former case then, can we say that the material used in these studies are problematic? No. The focus of the studying itself is not to memorize and apply the set theories, but to obtain the skills used in conceptualizing, implementing and evaluating these theories. More often than not professors and teachers are so grounded onto teaching quantitatively rather than qualitatively. A proof of which is to ask any student (or more importantly a graduate) to give them a type of examination, and you will get an answer which is linked to quantitative evaluation – multiple choice, enumeration, identification – before they mention qualitative types (i.e. essay-type or reflective exams). This form of education instills a very volatile idealism in students, which some carry and hold on to for the rest of their lives.
In some cases, this type of idealistic education would imply that these theories and models are to be applied in a certain setting only by those in power, and it would be one’s goal to reach this level in order to make the environment where the individual exists ideal for everyone. Ergo, the message sent to the scholar is “work your way up before using this model”. The subversive message here though still follows several logical flows, all of which still utilizing the ceteris paribus environment, such as “if A = responsibility 1, and B = responsibility 2, and C = promotion, then A+B = C” and the infamous “with great power comes great responsibility” which still follows the former equation. The result of which is an idealistic individual who would eventually question the process, model, and even sometimes the individual’s own being when the equation is not followed.
So can we say that in this case the professors and their messages become problematic? No. The messages, even if the subversive are discounted during discussions, would still have set effects on the scholars which would still result in disappointment in varying degrees. The scholars themselves are dynamic, and no one can accurately predict the fields that these scholars would step into after their studies (or during their studies, in some cases). Even if one predicts the field that they step into, no one can predict the conditions and factors that these workers go through in the workplace. The human factor eliminates all efforts to create a ceteris paribus environment and all hopes to make a workplace “ideal”. The result is still disappointment at a certain point on the then-scholar-now-professional.
How, then, can these situations be avoided? There is no point in coming up with one answer for this. However, the answer lies within the scholars and professionals. Paul Ricoeur stated that for one to become a person of faith one must let go of the religion that the individual stands with and question it; this way the individual can fully understand it and embrace it on his own will, making that individual a person of faith. This same concept can be applied to this problem. Higher learning is not the door, but it will show the person the way; it is up to the person to walk through the door, and how one goes there and walks through it is up to oneself. Grasping this should yield more productive results on both the teachers and students/professionals.
On the side of the educators, the focus of learning is not the quantitative knowledge but the qualitative, and nurturing the students’ intelligence (defined as the ability of an individual to adapt to one’s environment). Students should have the freedom to question and discern what may be fit for them and the environments where they would eventually work in. Professors should be dissuaded from “selling” these theories and models; rather, the presentation is for the students to learn AND unlearn, for them to accept and destroy, and ultimately derive the essence itself of the existence of these theories and solutions that would fit their environments.
On the students’ and professionals’ side, individuals must learn to break free from what they have learned and hoped for. No one has ever worked and yielded results for oneself only; all working people at all levels would have a consequential effect on the surrounding individuals. This is a factor that one must notice not only on oneself but on others as well, as these effects are factors that one must consider before actions and decisions are made. Idealism, ultimately, is not supposed to be targeted towards perfection, but rather towards a more progressive yield in all aspects. Every action and consequence is a progressive move after all, since these are all movements following a forward motion in time (ergo demotions are still forward movements, as these are effects that occur AFTER the cause happens). It is up to the individual to discern which of one’s options would be more fruitful not only for the self but for the surrounding individuals as well.
Idealism does not make or break a person, but the individual ultimately does. Current Location:Work, work, work Current Mood: Monday Blues Current Music: None, just the voices in my head
Lately, cries and prayers for change are heard all around us. Such changes are hoped for both in abstract forms – change in lifestyles, spiritual and/or emotional being, morals, outlooks in life, dreams and ambitions, etc – and material or specific forms – changes in the form of governance, institution leaders, laws and policies (even constitutions), technologies, budget allocations, educational materials, business processes, etc. Even generations are required to have a certain “change” in them to have its own identity (e.g. Generation X vs. Generation Y vs. Baby Boomers). But what is the reason behind these changes? Is it to attain a certain level of “perfection”?
Yes, change is inevitable, but what everyone has to keep in mind is that changes must be carefully planned and conceptualized, implemented and evaluated not for the benefit of the self only but for the good of the majority affected by it. When a certain change is made, the whole “process” in which the change is implemented alters to some degree. It could be as small as skipping an irrelevant process (such as gurgling mouthwash instead of flossing) to revamping a whole process (constitutional changes, elections, altering end-to-end business processes). Whether the outcome would be good or bad, the process is still changed; and whether the change be undone, an alter effect has already been achieved.
A particular desired effect for change is to achieve a “perfect process” in the environment where the affected individuals exist. But does anyone fully understand what perfection really is? Perfection is an illusion – it does not exist. No one can reach a state of perfection since change is inevitable. Perfection is also subjective, as the perfection of one is either insufficient or counter-progressive in the eyes of at least one other individual. It is not a matter of “it is perfect for me and I don’t care what others think of it”, otherwise the change would be a failure in terms of productivity and efficiency (since it is not for the good of the majority).
Perfection, or the belief that one exists in it, is also counter-productive. When one exists in this illusion, chances are that the individual would block out change. Although these people would want to believe that change is unnecessary, it still is inevitable, and refusing change would cause undesirable effects, such as the inability to adapt to one’s environment. For example, when the term Utopia is mentioned, a lot of people would automatically have an image of the Garden of Eden, or the extreme opposite – a fully automated world. In both cases, there would be a lot of elements lacking that would contribute to the community’s progress which, if not implemented, would cause a slowing down of progress and eventually a full stop to it.
The concept of perfection is instilled in everyone ever since we all started to think. From all parents wanting to have a “perfect child” to individuals hoping for “perfect lives”, these concepts have been major factors to the individual’s desire for change. This becomes problematic when change is coercively imposed either by the people around the individual or by the individuals upon themselves. Subtle to harsh and dramatic to sudden changes are implemented to alter a person’s way of thinking and lifestyle, but more often than not these changes are not for the good of everyone, but for a few chosen individuals who exist around the person who is subject for change. The individual, not the family, is the most basic element of a society, and it is for this reason that individuals are now attacked by agents of change. For reference, these can just be observed and compared to previous strategies and campaigns – from churchgoers having to attend Sunday mass as a community to the introduction of the TV mass; election campaign materials from being publicly displayed to being personally sent to an individuals homes; or advertisement from being broadcast to being sent to individuals via SMS.
The question that one has to ask himself is not “what happens next?”, but “is this change relevant?”. One major difference between man and beast is the ability to reflect. Reflection is not exclusive to those who implement change, but to those who accept change as well. Change happens in a two-way channel: the sender of the idea shares and the recipient either concurs or rejects. It is not omnipotent and unstoppable – and this is the one concept that a lot of people fail to realize. It is not the social acceptance and popularity bourn out of siding with the majority that makes a person important. The importance of the individual only comes out when a carefully reflected decision is made for change or against it.
Change is not always on the “good” side, nor is it on the “bad” side, if there are such sides. It just happens or gets postponed and developed. It is the understanding of these changes by each individual in the society that makes a decision which will define whether the change is for their progression or stagnation and regression. Individuals need to move away from the trial and error method and adapt a more reflective approach.
The end result of change is not perfection, but progress. Living in an ideal world does not mean that we have to be stagnant in it; rather, changes for adaptation and progress have to come into the picture at some point. Careful reflection must be done so as to cast aside counterproductive or self-centered changes. Expressing one’s reflective opinions must be instilled in each individual of the society. After all, expression is not an ability, but a right. Current Location:Ortigas Office Current Mood: sick Current Music: None, just listening to the a/c and phones ringing
04:07 pm - A very intriguing quote... I found this quote online and don't have the time to think and reflect about it yet. Still, I'll share it with those who still view my blog:
I slept with faith and found a corpse in my arms on awakening; I drank and danced all night with doubt and found her a virgin in the morning. ~Aleister Crowley, Book of Lies
I have an entry in the making... I'm already excited about finishing it. It's been a long, long time. :) Current Location:New office in Eastwood Current Mood: about finances Current Music: sound of the a/c humming
It would be best to start this entry with a disclaimer: this topic was suggested by a good friend of mine. I am not trying to justify any actions that I have done (or will be doing) simply because there isn't any reason to. And hopefully, the message in this entry will reach the people concerned.
The issue of having a relationship with someone from the same workplace has always brought work ethic into question. This is mainly because of the history of this situation - most couples tend to break company policies and procedures for their significant other.
Using the history of the situation would be an interesting argumentative point; however, this is definitely not valid. Arguing that work ethic is a factor in affecting work ethic is coloring the situation black and white - people in a relationship in the workplace have the tendency to have their work ethic affected, while others have a lesser tendency.
The use of this argument is unjust; this is a sort of discrimination wherein people are prejudged and placed in a certain frameset. All their negative actions (and lack of action) would be atrributed to their situation.
The question to place, therefore, is not about relationships affecting work ethic, but the work ethic of those who judge people in relationships in the same workplace, especially if these judgemental people are of higher ranks and whose opinions would affect the status of these employees. Not only should their work ethic be questioned, but their ability (or lack thereof) to analyze highly subjective situations.
Cases like these are not to be dismissed as black or white situations, but are to be analyzed as critically as other situations. The performance of these people in relationships must be studied; however, it shouldn't end there. The ups and downs in their performance may or may not be solely or partially attributed to the relationship. Other factors affect our everyday lives, including physical, emotional, psychological or even spiritual conditions. In any case, any empirical information obtained must be verified to be consistent before it becomes a point of judgement. For instance, a lover's quarrel might be attributed to a dive in a couple's performance for last month; however, another fight caused a rise in their performance for this month. This inconsistency is enough to disprove that the quarrels negatively or positively affect their performance.
Furthermore, it is illogical, not to mention cruel, to make the couple choose between their work and the relationship. When the situation is dealt with in this manner, it is inevitable that the concerned parties would be demoralized. Should they choose the relationship, they would lose their stability at work and, in most cases, their loyalty to their bosses and to the company they're working for. Should they choose their work over their relationship, they would consequentially be working half-heartedly for the company since they are, after all, human beings who value relationships. Being severed from an established relationship because of this kind of choice would shatter any soul. No matter how determined one would be to "get over it", there would always be that point wherein one would be so affected that everything around that person would experience these detrimental effects.
A humanistic touch to administrative and analytical skills wouldn't really hurt a company, now would it? Current Mood: sobra Current Music: Ambergris Hold Music
11:52 pm - so little time, so much to do... The frustration of not having the time to update my journal properly is growing exponentially. Grr. Let me just share a picture I took in school back in my jolly ol' college years. It's called "Gonzaga".
Current Mood: frustrated Current Music: an angry texan complaining about her light bill
08:49 pm - After 20,000 years... It feels different to have returned to my livejournal (LJ) after such a long time. As of now, I haven't had much reflection that I'd recall by the time I pullup this LJ.
However, I'll be sharing a few poems that I've written either by myself or with Kapi, one of my closest friends.
The next two poems have transpired out of the game called "The Beat Poetry Game". Two players take turns in writing a line to complete the ten-line poem. Each line must begin with the last word of the previous line (except, obviously, for the first line) and the last word of the last line has to be the same as the first word of the first line. After the poem is completed, the last word of each line is to be deleted (except that of the last line) and the whole poem is to be read straight, as it is done in beat poetry.
The first is in English:
Forsaken fruit, I am, on the dinner (table) Table tops are all I see, with a tantalizing taste of (tits) Tits, I eat them with cream or a cherry on (top) Top of the tree beneath me, that which leaves grow (below) Below the food chain is a cherry fested with (worms) Worms wriggling with want, writhing with white (waste) Waste is what we see in the landfill where we make (love) Love that lies, lies that live, lives that linger, lingering that (lusts) Lusts are what I smell in these forbidden (gardens) Gardens that lay fertile to the blooms of fruits that become forsaken.
The second poem is in Filipino:
Kunwa'y sa iyong paglayag aking nahagilap ang puslit na (aliswag) Aliswag ang alibughang pakiramdam ng anak na (naglayas) Naglayas sa pagpaparoon na tila pagbalik sa (kawalan) Kawalan ng karanasan ang kumakatay sa kanilang mga abang (nilalang) Nilalang na isinilang sa dilim at ibinuhay sa pabugso-bugsong (liwanag) Liwanag ng buwan ang siyang sumisilaw sa mga alingawngaw ng (gabi) Gabi para sa isang damdaming paunti-unting nawawalan ng (karikitan) Karikitan ng mga bituin ang gumigising sa (akin) Akin lamang ang paghuhusgang muling (bumabagabag) Bumabagabag sa akin ang mga mapanglawna gabi, kunwari. Current Mood: energetic Current Music: The Bangles - Eternal Flame
10:24 am - Short Story Here's a short story I wrote a few years back. It was published in our school mag. Enjoy. :)
==========================================
PIKNIK ni Nikko Tani
Di na dapat kita binisita dito. Hindi talaga.
Isipin mo: malapit nang mag-Disyembre, syempre tag-lamig na. Malambing ang hanging humahalik sa malangis na mukha ko, ngunit may ginaw rin. Hindi ko naririnig ang mga tambuchong kumakaraskas sa kalsada. Panay ang luntiang natatanaw ng aking mga mata. At syempre, lumulubog na ang araw kaya’t nababahiran ng pula ang asul na kalangitan. Di rin ako sanay sa amoy ng damong mamasa-masa, ngunit mas mahalimuyak di hamak sa mga esterong nadadaanan ko tuwing pauwi akong galing trabaho.
“An’tahimik mo naman,” biglang hirit mo.
“Ah… natatae lang ako,” sambat ko, sabay tawa.
Natatandaan ko tuloy ang sineng napanood ko sa VHS. Sabi ng bidang lalaki na natural lang sa mga lalaki na itaas ang kanyang depensa kapag nararamdaman niya na binubuksan ng ibang tao ang emosyonal na bahagi ng kamalayan niya. Lalo na kung babae ang nagtatangka nito. Tumawa lang ako noong narinig ko yon, ngunit ngayon ko lang naramdaman na totoo pala yun.
“’Di ka naman ganyan ‘pag natatae ka e,” sagot mo. “’Tsaka saan ka tatae dito? ‘Sa… bu… kid walang papel, uy!’”
“Tumigil ka, oy. Kain na tayo.” Ay shemay, sinabi ko nga pala na natatae ako. ‘Pag ganun ang nararamdaman ng tiyan mo di ka nga pala dapat magutom. Sana ‘wag mo yun isipin.
“Akala ko na-je-jebs ka na?” tanong mo sabay tawa.
Ay patay.
“Sige na nga, kain na tayo,” sabay bawi mo.
Salamat sa Diyos.
Nilapag ko na ang banig sa damo nang matandaan ko na nakalimutan ko yung pagkain sa kotse ko. Na halos trenta-minutong lakad mula rito.
“Um… ok lang ba kung maiwan muna kita dito?” tanong ko.
“Bakit?”
“Naiwan ko yung pagkain sa kotse e.”
“Samahan na lang kaya kita.”
“Di na, takbuhin ko na lang. Tsaka baka magreklamo ka pa, noh,” sabay ngisi ko.
“Hindi yan. Para namang napapagod ako noh,” banat mo. Yabang mo rin noh, naisip ko. Pero oo nga, di ka pala napapagod. “Ano, tara na!” sabay tayo mo.
Doon ko lang napansin na walang tao doon. Tayong dalawa lang. “Pansin mo bang ala masyadong tao dito ngayon?” sabay tayo ko.
“Oo. Kanina pa. Bakit?” tanong mo.
“Wala lang, pansin ko lang. Masama?” hirit ko sabay kindat sa yo.
Bumelat ka, sabay tawa. Nakakatuwa kang tingnan ng ganyan. Para kang bata na puno ng buhay. “E kasi naman hindi ito ang panahon para pumunta rito.” Sa bagay, naisip ko.
Pagkarating sa kotse, pinahintay kita sa may likuran. Kakahiya kasing ipakita sa ‘yo yung loob ng kotse e, marumi kasi. Kinuha ko na lang yung plastik na may lamang dalawang hotdog, pansit, at tubig. I-lock ko na sana ang kotse, kaya lang nakita ko ang tape ni Richard Reynoso na may lyrics pa. Pwede to, naisip ko. Binulsa ko, sabay lock na ng kotse.
Medyo tahimik ka naman nung pabalik na tayo. “O, ikaw naman ang tahimik.” Ngumiti ka lang sa akin, kaya lang may naramdaman akong bagabag sa ngiti mo. Napagpasyahan kong tumahimik na lang, baka may masabi pa akong mali.
Pagkaupo sa banig, inilabas ko na ang pagkain sa plastik. “Hotdog?” alok ko. Umiling ka ng mabagal. “Di ako kumakain, diba?” Ay oo. Pinagtatalunan natin yun dati pa. Di tuloy ako nakakain ng masyado. “Anong iniisip mo? Nag-aalala na ako dito,” sabi ko pagkalagok ko. Umiling ka ulit. Hihirit ulit dapat ako nang biglang tinanong mo ko, “Masaya ka ba ngayon?”
Binuksan ko ang bibig ko para sumagot, ngunit walang lumabas na salita rito.
“Masaya ka ba ngayon? Ito ba talaga ang gusto mo, ha?”
“Ginagawa ko lang ‘to para sa atin. ‘Wag ka nang mareklamo.”
“’Wag mareklamo?! Alam mo ba ang nangyayari sa atin?!”
“Oo, alam ko.”
“At masaya kang ganito?”
“Di ko alam. Di ko talaga alam.” Sabay inom ulit. “Ba’t mo naman naitanong?” Parang di ko alam ang sagot.
Di ka sumagot sa tanong na yon. “Alam mo, masaya lang ako na binisita mo ko ngayon,” sabi mo. “Naisip mo bang ngayon mo lang talaga ako binisita?” sabay ngiti mo.
Wala rin akong naisambat sa sinabi mong yon.
Mahal, malamig din pala sa bansang ito. Tama ka. Malaki talaga ang kita ko rito. Nagutom din ako, sa wakas, kaya lang di na ako kumakain para maka-ipon ng malaki-laki para sa kasal natin. Hintayin mo lang ako, at huwag kang mag-alala. Mababait ang mga tao rito, inaalagaan ako nila Mister at Misis Po. Uuwi din ako sa Pasko. Miss kita. Mahal kita.
“Para namang kaya ko,” nasabi ko. At alam ko ang magiging sagot mo.
“Dinadalaw naman kita kung kelan kaya ko, a.” Sabi ko na nga ba.
Nanahimik lang tayo ng ilang saglit nang may dumaan na mag-asawa. O magkapatid. Ewan, basta lalaki at babaeng mukhang magkasing-edad. Parehong malungkot at mabagal ang lakad nilang dalawa. “O, mukha na tayong ganyan,” hirit mo, sabay halakhak. Sasabihan kita sana na baka marinig ka, kaya lang sa hinhin ng boses mo wala naman talagang nakakarinig sa yo e.
“Ano ba talaga nangyari sa mukha mo?”
“Wala ‘to. Nahulog lang ako sa hagdan.”
“Wow… at sa tingin ko’y dun mo rin nakuha yang pasa sa braso mo.”
“Hindi… wala talaga ‘to. ‘Wag mo nang alalahanin.”
“Sinaktan ka 'no?”
Iyak.
“Ba’t di ka humingi ng tulong? O sumigaw man lang?”
Iyak.
“Ngiti naman diyan!” biglang sigaw mo. Akala ko hinihiritan mo yung babae’t lalaki. Ako pala. Naiwan ko na rin yung pansit ko. Lumamig tuloy. Binalot ko na lang siya, baunin ko na lang, baka ako gutumin pauwi. Grabe pa naman trapik dito.
Marami akong naisip sa sandali na yon. Parang kailan lang na iba ang pagsasama natin. Parang masayang hindi. Masaya sa loob, ngunit iba ang naipapakita sa labas. Napangiti ako sa alaala kong pagtutulad ko ng relasyon natin sa balitang pinapanood ko sa TV. Nakaktawa, at nakakalungkot. “Ngunit noon yon,” biglang sabi ko. Siyet. Nabanggit ko ang iniisip ko nang hindi ko nalalaman.
“Ha?”
“A, wala. Naisip ko lang… iba tayo noon, iba tayo ngayon.” Isa siya sa mga bagay na ayaw kong isipin, ngunit naroon na. Kasaysayan na hindi na kailanmang magagalaw, ngunit magagalawan.
Mahal, di ko na kaya dito. Sinasaktan nila ako sa bawat ginagawa kong mali. Gusto ko nang umuwi. Nagpaayos na ako ng papeles para makauwi ngayong buwan na ito. Tumakas muna ako at nagtatago dito kela Helen. Hintayin mo ako. Mahal na mahal kita.
“Sa tingin mo,” biglang tanong mo, “sino sa atin ang nagkamali?”
“Nagkamaling ano?”
“Nagkamali… sa lahat. Sa lahat ng nangyari.”
Napaisip ako. Iisa lang ang pumasok sa isipan ko noong sandaling yon – ako. Ako, ako, ako. Ginusto mo lang naman na guminhawa at gumanda ang kinabukasan natin. Kasalanan ba yun? Pagkakamali ba yun? Pagkakamali ang hindi isipin ang kapakanan mo.
Bago pa ako makasalita, naunahan mo na ako. “’Wag na ‘wag mong sasabihin na ikaw ang may sala,” sabay hawak sa kamay ko. “Naintindihan mo ko, at masaya ako sa ginawa mo.”
Nawalan na ako ng sasabihin. Naramdaman ko ang tape na dala-dala ko sa bulsa ko, at nilabas ko ito. “Ano yan? Para saan yan?” tanong mo.
Hinawakan ko na lang ang kamay mo, sabay kanta ng korus ng kanta natin. “Hindi ko kaya na limutin kita… masdan mo, lumuluha ang aking mga mata…”
Natawa ka. Marahil sa tuwa. “Ang korni mo! Tsaka di ka naman lumuluha a.”
Barado ako dun a. Masamang biro yun a.
“Masamang biro yan.”
“Hindi ako nagbibiro. Parating na po siya. Nakikiramay lang po.”
“Ikaw kasi, ang korni mo e!” sabay tawa ulit. “At para namang malilimutan mo ako… alam ko naman na hindi mo ako malilimutan, diba?”
Hindi kita malilimutan… kailanma’y di pababayaan…
Tiningnan ko na lang siya at ngumiti. Nginitian mo rin ako.
“Mahal kita.”
“Mahal din kita.”
'Di na dapat kita binisita dito. Hindi talaga. Ngunit nadaigan ng ligayang dulot ng muling pagsasama natin ang aliswag na hindi ko maalis ng ilang taon na mula ibinaba ka sa lupang natatapakan ko.
At sa isang kisapmata na parang kasingbilis ng pagsasama natin, di na ulit kita nakita. Current Mood: crushed Current Music: True Faith - Awit Para sa Kanya
12:23 am - About CLOWNS I once heard a line that goes something like this: "Clowns are the saddest people in the world". The first time I heard it, I shrugged it off since I didn't have any friends who worked as clowns, thus no first hand interactions with them to verify this belief. Around a decade has passed before I understood what this meant. When people hear the word "clown", the image that first comes to mind is not the facial paint or the tricks that he/she would perform, but the entertainment that comes with the package. Laughter and joy are the two main products of a clown. However, the clown establishes a different kind or rapport with his/her audience - one that others the clown from the audience altogether, enabling the crowd to roar with laughter without relating to the silliness of the clown. This kind of entertainment places the clown where no one else stands - under a spotlight. While some people say that this is an opportunity for fame and fortune, I say that this is ISOLATION, the main root of sorrow for a clown. The facial paint is partially related to this sort of isolation, since it is a distinguishing characteristic that would keep the audience reminded that they are not the clown, and the clown is not them. The facial paint that a clown wears is not just to entertain people. It is a necessity for a clown, since it covers any signs of fear or nervousness. It does one of two things to the face of the wearer - one, it makes the face look as if it doesn't move (giving it a cartoon effect) therefore giving the clown a perpetual smile; and two, it highlights all of the entertainer's joyful reactions. Considering both uses, the clown is, therefore, under a constant state of REPRESSION, another root of sorrow. Bright colored clothes are always part of a clown's wardrobe. Can a clown wear a plain shirt, pair of handwashed jeans and leather shoes? Nope. A clown needs to look like a clown to distinguish him/herself as the entertainer. These clothes that we consider as weird or goofy become a uniform for the clown; without it, he cannot do his work efficiently. We can therefore see this as CONFORMITY on the clown's part; it's not just about the "uniform", but the tradition altogether. It is natural for a clown to want the spotlight shining on him/her. After all, it is part of the job and, more importantly, part of a clown's life. This is why in spite of how serious or spectacular a certain show could be, the clown could still come in at any time and grab everyone's attention. When does this frequently happen? The clown comes out when he/she thinks that someone else is gaining more popularity than what he/she currently has. This is brought about by a dormant INSECURITY inherent in all clowns. Now, let's place together all the characteristics hidden behind the cute and entertaining smile of a clown: ISOLATION, REPRESSION, CONFORMITY, INSECURITY. It's not really sad that a clown possesses these characteristics. However, it is really tragic that a president possesses these. Current Mood: worried Current Music: CheChe Lazaro's voice
07:03 pm - It works! Wow! Now I can share some of my pics with those who are kind enough to visit my blog... hehe. Notice the semblance between the pic below and my pic at the right...
Some people can be so unoriginal. And I'm not talking about myself. ;p Current Mood: accomplished Current Music: Mos Def - California
03:40 am - Don't try this at work... The day before yesterday, I was applying for a job somewhere in Makati. I got past the first interview and the succeeding three tests. I was having fun, until the final interview, that is. The interviewer asked me, "If you could change anything in your life, what would it be and why?". I should have given the guy a break and answered standard strength-weakness replies (as Myra suggested), but I didn't; instead, I reflected out loud. "I believe that I cannot answer that question, sir," I replied, "because I do not live my life on regrets." The interview went on as follows:
Interviewer: Does that mean that you do not want to improve yourself?
Nikko: It does not necessarily equate to that, sir.
Interviewer: Why is that so?
Nikko: By not regretting, I am able to move on. Any movement forward is a progression, and it never signifies staticity or regression.
After rephrasing several times more, the guy came up with an example: "If you could go back in time and kill Adolf Hitler, would you do it?" I was silent for around 5 seconds, then I answered, "No, sir. I definitely wouldn't." I then explained that it was his cruelty and inhumanity that is partially the root of the refinement of society's structures. Nazism and his dream of an ultra arian race (not the same as the Nietzschean Übermensch) has jolted people from their overly-utopic dreams and has become the living nightmare - that which one will never want to reach. From this new low, societies started rising and, at the same time, knowing what to avoid or keep. This is a refinement in another sense - the discounting of the unwanted to purify a system. But honestly, though, I didn't want to kill Hitler because of one simple reason - tampering with the past greatly affects the future. It may be theoretical, but I don't think I want to take the risk. This may lead to my non-existence and/or, more importantly, the non-existence of the people I love. Even if I do exist, I may be away from the people I now love. Yes, I may have another set of people to spend my life with, but I don't think I want to exchange the people I now have for anyone else in the world. And people who know me would testify that I am not flattering anyone. I think that the interview did not earn me bonus points, even if the interviewer had a huge smile on his chinese face. Hmm... me and my big mouth. Oh well... c'est la vie. Current Mood: amused Current Music: The Calling - Adrienne
01:29 am - Qualification: FEMALE. I have been keeping my mouth shut on this issue, as it does not give me a good reputation to talk about it in public. But I can't stand it anymore. Not after what I've seen today at the job fair (see title). Feminism, as we all (SHOULD) know it, is (SUPPOSED TO BE) about equality of rights. They say the way to achieve this is to empower women. At this point, I have to raise the first set of questions: what do we mean by empowerment? What kind of power should be endowed on women, if we have to? To what extent should this empowering reach? Lord Acton wrote the famous line, "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely". As the society slowly gives in to the cries of feminism, we must be critical of the newly acquired power women have. A clear example of power corrupting those who drink from it would be the GABRIELA group. Initially, there slogan already says a lot about today's "popular" feminism - "BABAE, BATA, BAYAN, IPAGLABAN". So is it intentional that guys were forgotten? And spare me from the alibis that guys are included in the "BAYAN" part. Aren't guys worth fighting for? And how about male children? surely, their youth will fade away someday. Does this mean that they, too, will not be fought for? A lot of people argue that abuse of women occur a lot in society. I can't refute this; statistics don't lie. However, I cannot say that this is the cause for greater power to be laid in the hands of women (I will get back to the explanation of this sentence in a while). How, then, should we treat the statistics showing that men are also abused? Clearly, our society would either: 1)shrug it off and just console the guy victim, or 2)laugh at the guy and label him as "under the saya". Is this equality of rights? I say nay. People argue on feminism's defense pointing out several incidents and cases of abuse of women and violation of their rights. This, for me, is not the way to look at the country's situation. Let's put it this way: layout the map of NCR in front of you. Say we have 10 counts of violations in the Makati area, 20 in QC, 30 in Manila, 20 in Pasay, etc. Imagine each case as a point in the map, each where it happened. Looking at the map, we'd say that there were a lot violations that have occurred in the Metro. But what would be the basis? The number of the points. Has anyone considered the AREA that the points haven't covered? No. This is one problem that is overseen. We cannot conclude that we live in a patriarchal society just because of points scattered over a given area. Why? These points are representative of the recorded abuses, which have been affected by the culture of a society. This is where we go onto our second point. Culture plays a major factor when studying the context of our society in terms of the trend of feminism. We cannot shrug it off as unimportant, since it gives us an explanation why there are so few cases of women abusing the rights of men. In our society, men still live with the "macho" image, therefore explaining the lack of cases filed against women by male victims. Furthermore, there are a lot of laws that go against men (contrary to popular belief that the constitution is patriarchal). Case in point: has anyone seen the law on physical assault? Women can slap a guy in public, and it would be shrugged off - because the woman cannot be held liable for it. If a man intentionally bumps the shoulder of a woman in public, we'd be having a physical assault case on the guy. Another case in point: the sexual harrassment law. This speaks for itself. Yet another one: cases of rape. Rape is defined as a crime done on women, not by women. Women can never be rapists, although a woman can very well rape a guy. Also, jobs have become limited for men nowadays, as not all men are accepted in all types of jobs; women, on the other hand, can get into any job that guys can handle and, at times, being a woman becomes a qualification for supposedly unisexual jobs. Is this what we call equal opportunities? I don't think so. A political science major and I were in a discourse about this issue, and she defended feminism's side by saying that exceptions or special treatment is given to women because, "women are weaker than guys". THIS IS ONE MAJOR POINT. Who dictates who is "stronger" and "weaker"? Only ourselves. Women who believe that we are in a patriarchal society admit that they are weak. This admittance does not help one develop a sense of equality; rather, this would feed the power-hungry persona in all of us. Furthermore, they influence other women into believing their ideologies. This indoctrination is very counter-productive, as it would eventually lead everyone into believing that women are "kawawa", even when the system serves everyone equally. Utopic as it may sound, the solution to these problems would be seeing oneself in an equal society and not enframing oneself in an ideology or preset framework. If a violation occurrs, we cry foul. If none happens, then just be quiet and content ("content" here does not mean unproductive contentment nor finding loopholes just to get what one wants, but living each day as is, enjoying all the positive experiences that we have while at the same time aiming for a better existence - meliora eligo - without the crab mentality or asking for special treatment, since "special treatments" marginalize the other). If we want to live in an equal society, then stop complaining and start acting. Most importantly, start believing that we do live in one. Current Mood: bitchy Current Music: Goo Goo Dolls - Two Days in February
01:48 am - Did saints know who they were? Crappy films still have something good in them... I saw this film on HBO the other night - "Saint Sinner". It was based on a Clive Barker book (I think) and was very badly produced. That aside, there was one line which stuck to my head, and it goes like this: "If a saint knew who he was, he would not be a saint." The line hit a major point. On a shallow level, it meant a lot, as it provokes reflection on the existence of the Saints of the Catholic Church. On a deeper level, it still hits a point, encompassing all of us into reflecting on our being. True, the Saints never knew what would be of them after their death. It's the same as how heroes never knew of the reverence they have brought their names, families and, at times, countries. Going back to theology, these heroes and saints were all "normal" beings who just gave their best at what they did, adhering to their faith, principles, ideologies and philosophies, i.e. being the best that they could be. One question that I currently reflecting on, though... have they ever dreamed of greatness and popularity? Not in the negative or unproductive way, but have they considered the possibility of their elevation into hero/saint after dying? In a deeper sense of the line, we could all relate to it. The line can be translated into, "If X knew who he/she was, he/she would not be X". This reflection would bring a lot of questions into light: Am I who I know I am? Do I really know who I am? Can I, therefore, know who I am in order to be? My reflections have led me to go back to the human person. Humans are dynamic; we change everyday, every hour, every minute, even every second and so on. The fact that we are living constitutes change in every moment that passes. Without any change, there would be no growth, hence, no life. The 15 (or more) years of education that we go through has been, at times, defined as a time for "self-exploration" and "knowing oneself". Using the above-mentioned line as a point of reference, I believe that the full knowledge of oneself is impossible at any given moment. The so-called knowing oneself is not only for one given moment, but for one given level as well. For example, I know that I am typing right now and at the same time thinking of what must follow. But that definition encompasses action alone, so my next definition would be that I am typing, thinking of what must follow and feeling despair. This knowledge of my being in the state of despair has already affected the previous, undefined emotion of despair, since I have defined it from a third-person's perspective. This, therefore, changes my definition into myself typing, thinking of what must come next and contemplative of my emotional despair. This goes on infinitely. How, then, if I knew who I really am beforehand? This would remove the whole notion of my being Nikko. Let Nikko(T)=Nikko from first-person perspective, and Nikko(X)=Nikko from a third-person perspective. Nikko(X) is a person who writes a lot and ends up in tragic relationships. If Nikko(T) knew who he was before he got into the characteristics and activities that have identified me as Nikko(X), then Nikko(T) would have the capability to change Nikko(X). If Nikko(T) knew that he would end up in tragic relationships and changed the results of which, then Nikko(T) would no longer be Nikko(X) but another Nikko. This spontaneity is part of our being. There is nothing that is exact - even science (especially social sciences) admits that it has to be open to change. This, therefore, must not lead us to despair. The lack of knowledge of ourselves must not be mistaken as an admittance of defeat, but as a drive for a further search for the true self. There are a lot more ideas that I can add to this entry but I'm getting really tired and sleepy... I hate it when sleep gets in the way of my train of thought. Current Mood: frustrated Current Music: Maroon 5 - This Love
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
sushi_steak's journal![[mood icon]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/mood/charitycam/goth_boy/sad.gif){kind=small}
crappy
![[mood icon]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/mood/charitycam/goth_boy/angry.gif){kind=small}
irritated
![[mood icon]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/mood/charitycam/goth_boy/happy.gif){kind=small}
mellow
![[mood icon]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/mood/charitycam/goth_boy/thoughtful.gif){kind=small}
inspired
![[mood icon]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/mood/charitycam/goth_boy/sleepy.gif){kind=small}
sleepy
![[mood icon]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/mood/charitycam/goth_boy/sick.gif){kind=small}
sick
![[mood icon]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/mood/charitycam/goth_boy/bouncy.gif){kind=small}
energetic
![[mood icon]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/mood/charitycam/goth_boy/working.gif){kind=small}
accomplished